One of the false claims made by “wind energy” advocates is that
greater use of this potential energy source would reduce US dependence on oil, including oil
imports.

In fact, adding more wind turbines will have no significant
impact on US oil consumption.

Unfortunately, many well-meaning people (including some prolific
authors of letters to editors and reporters) have accepted the wind advocates’ claims about
reductions in oil use. This brief paper explains why the reduced oil use claim is false.

The claim about reduced oil dependence is only one of many false
and misleading claims made on behalf of wind energy by the wind industry, US Department of
Energy (DOE), DOE’s National Renewable Energy “Laboratory” (NREL) and other wind
advocates. Other such claims are discussed elsewhere.1

Facts about oil use in electric generation in the US:

1. The only potential use of wind turbines is to produce
electricity.

2. Very little oil is used in the US to
produce electricity. In 2002, only 2.45% of the electricity produced in the US
was produced by using oil.2
The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects that percentage to drop
to 1.68% by 2025.3

3. Most of the use of oil in the US for electricity generation
occurs in a few states, as shown in the attached. For example, in 2002, 3 states (Florida, New York
and Hawaii) accounted for nearly 58% of all the electricity in the US generated by using
oil.

4. Oil accounted for more than 5% of electric generation in only
9 states and the District of Columbia. Those states are Hawaii, Florida, Massachusetts,
Delaware, Alaska, New York, Connecticut, Maine and Virginia.

5. Oil accounted for less than 1% of electric generation in 31
states. Twenty-six of those were under ˝ of 1%.

Reasons why wind energy will have no significant impact on oil
use for electric generation

6. Even in those few states where oil accounts for more than 1%
of electricity generation, adding wind turbines would have very little, if any, impact on
oil consumption. The facts supporting this are complex and many of those who have believed
the false claims might be forgiven for their errors. However, the complexity does not
excuse officials from DOE, NREL or the wind industry who should know better. But, in any
case, here is why wind energy is highly unlikely to reduce oil use in electric
generation:

a. About 17% of the oil used in electric
generation in 2002 was “distillate” oil4
used in combustion turbine and internal combustion electric generating units.5
The cost of this oil is high and such units are used almost exclusively in times
when electricity demand is at its highest level (e.g., during hot weekday
afternoons in August). Little if any wind generated electricity would be
available during those times.

b. The remaining 83% of the oil used in electric generation was
“residual oil” (#4 & #5) that is used in older, oil-fired steam-electric generating units
(oil is burned to heat water and create steam to drive a turbine).

c. These older oil-fired steam-electric units
are quite unlikely to be the units that are backed down or ramped up to adjust
for the intermittent, highly volatile (output often varies widely minute to
minute) and largely unpredictable output from wind turbines –which produce
electricity only when the wind is blowing in the right speed range.6

d. Instead, the generating units that are likely to be used to
“back up” the intermittent wind turbines will be units that are either:

1) Designed and designated to serve in an Automatic Generation
Control (AGC) mode to keep an electric grid in balance (i.e., frequency and
voltage),

2) Producing at less than full capacity and capable of ramping
up or down on short notice, or

3) Operating in a “spinning reserve” mode.7

Electricity supply and demand must be kept in balance.
Electricity production is constantly adjusted to meet electricity demand. The generating
units that serve best in backing up intermittent, volatile wind turbines are hydropower
units because the output from these units can be increased or decreased almost
instantaneously.

The next best alternatives are gas-fired turbine-based generating units (e.g.,
combined-cycle or larger simple cycle). Oil-fired units are less likely to be used in the
required balancing role for wind turbines because (a) the oil-fired combustion turbine and
internal combustion units are unlikely to be running except in times of peak demand, and
(b) the oil-fired steamelectric units are likely to have slower response times than is necessary
to back up wind turbines.

e. The generating units used to “back up” intermittent and
volatile wind generation will depend on the generating mix and other conditions in the grid
control area that is receiving the electricity from wind turbines. In the Pacific-Northwest, for example, hydro power would likely serve in the balancing role – with no
savings in oil. In New England, with its heavy dependence on natural gas and a
significant amount of newer gas-fired generating capacity, a gas-fired unit would likely
serve in the balancing role, again with little or no savings in oil use.

7. In summary, there is very little likelihood that any oil use
in electric generation would be reduced by adding wind turbines. This would certainly be true in
those 31 states with less than 1% ─or less than ˝ of 1% of their electric generation
from oil.

The electric industry officials who will have the exact data on
the generating units that are run to balance the intermittent and volatile output from wind
turbines are those who handle the day to day management and control of electric grids and
transmission systems; i.e., depending on the region of the US, the power pool, the
independent system operator (ISO), or the regional transmission organization (RTO).

Glenn R. Schleede
is semi-retired after working on energy and related matters in government and
the private sector for over 30 years. He now devotes a significant portion
of his time to self-financed analysis of and writing about (a) government policies, programs and regulations that are
detrimental to the interests of consumers and taxpayers, and (b) government or private sector programs and
projects that are presented to the media, public and government officials in a false or misleading way. “Wind energy”
is a frequent topic.
______
* Used with permission of Glenn R. Schleede.
Glenn R. Schleede
Round Hill, VA 20141-2574